[003]
maninahat
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
\'\'\' \
to:
\\\'\\\'\\\' \\\"The Happy negro\\\" \\\'\\\'\\\'
-->\\\'\\\' \\\"There\\\'s also the whole thing about talking about all different sex workers as being \\\"the hooker, happy or otherwise\\\". People take the liberty to discuss whether \\\"the hooker\\\" is happy or not, a liberty they would never take against any other group since it would then be obvious how patronizing and objectifying it really is. For example, talking about social problems in Africa or in urban areas of American cities in terms of whether \\\"the negro\\\" is happy or not would of course be unthinkable.\\\" \\\'\\\'
Actually, people do take that \\\"liberty\\\" in regards to black people. Indeed, no discussion about \\\'\\\'SongOfTheSouth\\\'\\\' is complete without a mention of the UnfortunateImplications of [[MagicalNegro Uncle Remus]]. To put it simply: would it be acceptable in this day and age to portray a black slave \\\'\\\'enjoying\\\'\\\' their lot in life? I don\\\'t doubt that there may well have been such slaves who were treated better and enjoyed their position. However, if you are going to have just one slave character in a story, you pretty much have to make one who is damn discontent with their position. The alternative results in a tremendous case of ValuesDissonance.
In regard to prostitutes, I think it is the same problem. If you are going to have only one prostitute, they\\\'ll end up representing \\\'\\\'the entire sex trade\\\'\\\', whether the writer intends that to be the case or not. With that in mind, the writer has to be very careful about how that prostitute is portrayed.
The only obvious solutions are to either have multiple prostitutes who portray different aspects of the industry (including the involuntary, dangerous and abusive parts), or have that one prostitute explicitly mention the other hookers who \\\'\\\'don\\\'t\\\'\\\' have it as good as her.
-->\\\'\\\' \\\"There\\\'s also the whole thing about talking about all different sex workers as being \\\"the hooker, happy or otherwise\\\". People take the liberty to discuss whether \\\"the hooker\\\" is happy or not, a liberty they would never take against any other group since it would then be obvious how patronizing and objectifying it really is. For example, talking about social problems in Africa or in urban areas of American cities in terms of whether \\\"the negro\\\" is happy or not would of course be unthinkable.\\\" \\\'\\\'
Actually, people do take that \\\"liberty\\\" in regards to black people. Indeed, no discussion about \\\'\\\'SongOfTheSouth\\\'\\\' is complete without a mention of the UnfortunateImplications of [[MagicalNegro Uncle Remus]]. To put it simply: would it be acceptable in this day and age to portray a black slave \\\'\\\'enjoying\\\'\\\' their lot in life? I don\\\'t doubt that there may well have been such slaves who were treated better and enjoyed their position. However, if you are going to have just one slave character in a story, you pretty much have to make one who is damn discontent with their position. The alternative results in a tremendous case of ValuesDissonance.
In regard to prostitutes, I think it is the same problem. If you are going to have only one prostitute, they\\\'ll end up representing \\\'\\\'the entire sex trade\\\'\\\', whether the writer intends that to be the case or not. With that in mind, the writer has to be very careful about how that prostitute is portrayed.
The only obvious solutions are to either have multiple prostitutes who portray different aspects of the industry (including the involuntary, dangerous and abusive parts), or have that one prostitute explicitly mention the other hookers who \\\'\\\'don\\\'t\\\'\\\' have it as good as her.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
\'\'\' \
to:
\\\'\\\'\\\' \\\"The Happy negro\\\" \\\'\\\'\\\'
-->\\\'\\\' \\\"There\\\'s also the whole thing about talking about all different sex workers as being \\\"the hooker, happy or otherwise\\\". People take the liberty to discuss whether \\\"the hooker\\\" is happy or not, a liberty they would never take against any other group since it would then be obvious how patronizing and objectifying it really is. For example, talking about social problems in Africa or in urban areas of American cities in terms of whether \\\"the negro\\\" is happy or not would of course be unthinkable.\\\" \\\'\\\'
Actually, people do take that \\\"liberty\\\" in regards to black people. Indeed, no discussion about \\\'\\\'SongOfTheSouth\\\'\\\' is complete without a mention of the UnfortunateImplications of [[MagicalNegro Uncle Remus]]. To put it simply: would it be acceptable in this day and age to portray a black slave \\\'\\\'enjoying\\\'\\\' their lot in life? I don\\\'t doubt that there may well have been such slaves who were treated better and enjoyed their position. If you are going to have just one character, representative of slaves in a story, you pretty much have to make one who is damn discontent with their position. The alternative results in a tremendous case of ValuesDissonance.
In regard to prostitutes, I think it is the same problem. If you are going to have only one prostitute, they\\\'ll end up representing \\\'\\\'the entire sex trade\\\'\\\', whether the writer intends that to be the case or not. With that in mind, the writer has to be very careful about how that prostitute is portrayed.
The only obvious solutions are to either have multiple prostitutes who portray different aspects of the industry (including the involuntary, dangerous and abusive parts), or have that one prostitute explicitly mention the other hookers who \\\'\\\'don\\\'t\\\'\\\' have it as good as her.
-->\\\'\\\' \\\"There\\\'s also the whole thing about talking about all different sex workers as being \\\"the hooker, happy or otherwise\\\". People take the liberty to discuss whether \\\"the hooker\\\" is happy or not, a liberty they would never take against any other group since it would then be obvious how patronizing and objectifying it really is. For example, talking about social problems in Africa or in urban areas of American cities in terms of whether \\\"the negro\\\" is happy or not would of course be unthinkable.\\\" \\\'\\\'
Actually, people do take that \\\"liberty\\\" in regards to black people. Indeed, no discussion about \\\'\\\'SongOfTheSouth\\\'\\\' is complete without a mention of the UnfortunateImplications of [[MagicalNegro Uncle Remus]]. To put it simply: would it be acceptable in this day and age to portray a black slave \\\'\\\'enjoying\\\'\\\' their lot in life? I don\\\'t doubt that there may well have been such slaves who were treated better and enjoyed their position. If you are going to have just one character, representative of slaves in a story, you pretty much have to make one who is damn discontent with their position. The alternative results in a tremendous case of ValuesDissonance.
In regard to prostitutes, I think it is the same problem. If you are going to have only one prostitute, they\\\'ll end up representing \\\'\\\'the entire sex trade\\\'\\\', whether the writer intends that to be the case or not. With that in mind, the writer has to be very careful about how that prostitute is portrayed.
The only obvious solutions are to either have multiple prostitutes who portray different aspects of the industry (including the involuntary, dangerous and abusive parts), or have that one prostitute explicitly mention the other hookers who \\\'\\\'don\\\'t\\\'\\\' have it as good as her.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
It appears that the wiki treats TheWastelands and TheWasteLands as the same WikiWord, so I can\'t make a redirect or anything. I dunno what else to do about it.
to:
It appears that the wiki treats TheDarkTower/TheWastelands and TheDarkTower/TheWasteLands as the same WikiWord, so I can\\\'t make a redirect or anything. I dunno what else to do about it.
